Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Tanks”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Waste Retrieval Enhancements to Achieve Preliminary Cease Waste Removal in Savannah River Site Liquid Waste Tanks 9H and 10H – 25348

The Liquid Waste (LW) contractor at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC). The LW Mission is tasked with processing legacy nuclear waste stored in underground waste tanks for final disposition. The Concentration, Storage, and Transfer Facilities (CSTF) contain 43 active waste tanks and 8 closed waste tanks between the two tank farms, F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) and H-Area Tank Farm (HTF). The first steps in the Waste Retrieval and Tank Closure (WRTC) process are the waste removal campaigns, consisting of either salt dissolution or sludge mobilization. Two tanks that are rapidly approaching the final closure determination and have demonstrated considerable success with salt dissolution are Tanks 9 and 10. The closure of these tanks is a high priority for the LW Mission due to the greater environmental risk they pose since both tanks reside within the water table and contain active leak sites from the primary tank to the annulus space. Tanks 9 and 10 have each recently completed their respective salt dissolution campaigns and achieved the Preliminary Cease Waste Removal (PCWR) milestone.

Stetson, Jacqueline G.↗
DOE OSTI2019

Corrosion Evaluation for Tank 241-AP-106 Re-purposing

Tank AP-106 will be an integral part of the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste (DF-LAW) activity. This tank is an underground, carbon steel, double shell tank (DST). Before it can be utilized, the Cs-137 concentration levels in the waste must be reduced significantly. The AP-106 re-purposing process will manage normal waste tank additions procedures such that waste acceptance criteria objectives for Cs-137 removal are achieved. As this process was being developed, concerns regarding tank integrity during and after the process to Tank AP-106 and associated tanks (i.e., AP-102, AN-101, and AP-108) were addressed. The degradation mechanisms identified include: general and pitting corrosion, caustic stress corrosion cracking, galvanic corrosion, and microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC). Recommendations were provided to minimize the exposure of the tank to corrosive conditions (see Section 6.0). These recommendations included chemistry adjustments at defined steps in the process that will maintain the waste in compliance with the corrosion control program. Additionally, sampling and inspection (see Sections 6.0 and 7.0, respectively) recommendations that will assess the final condition of the tank environment and the tank were presented. The greatest risk for this process involves the handling of large quantities of Columbia River water (i.e., greater than 450,000 gallons) within the AP-106, associated tanks and supporting infrastructure (i.e., transfer line piping). As long as this water is blended into the supernate in a timely fashion, and the waste is adjusted appropriately with corrosion inhibitors, the final condition is expected to be within compliance. Recommendations were also made to address process interruptions that could result in exposure of the tank walls to aggressive conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2011

INVESTIGATING SUSPENSION OF MST, CST, AND SIMULATED SLUDGE SLURRIES IN A PILOT-SCALE WASTE TANK

The Small Column Ion Exchange (SCIX) process is being developed to remove cesium, strontium, and actinides from Savannah River Site (SRS) Liquid Waste using an existing waste tank (i.e., Tank 41H) to house the process. Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) is conducting pilot-scale mixing tests to determine the pump requirements for suspending and resuspending monosodium titanate (MST), crystalline silicotitanate (CST), and simulated sludge. The purpose of this pilot scale testing is for the pumps to resuspend the MST, CST, and simulated sludge particles so that they can be removed from the tank, and to suspend the MST so it can contact strontium and actinides. The pilot-scale tank is a 1/10.85 linear scaled model of Tank 41H. The tank diameter, tank liquid level, pump nozzle diameter, pump elevation, and cooling coil diameter are all 1/10.85 of their dimensions in Tank 41H. The pump locations correspond to the proposed locations in Tank 41H by the SCIX program (Risers B5, B3, and B1). Previous testing showed that three Submersible Mixer Pumps (SMPs) will provide sufficient power to initially suspend MST in an SRS waste tank, and to resuspend MST that has settled in a waste tank at nominal 45 C for four weeks. The conclusions from this analysis are: (1) Three SMPs will be able to resuspend more than 99.9% of the MST and CST that has settled for four weeks at nominal 45 C. The testing shows the required pump discharge velocity is 84% of the maximum discharge velocity of the pump. (2) Three SMPs will be able to resuspend more than 99.9% of the MST, CST, and simulated sludge that has settled for four weeks at nominal 45 C. The testing shows the required pump discharge velocity is 82% of the maximum discharge velocity of the pump. (3) A contact time of 6-12 hours is needed for strontium sorption by MST in a jet mixed tank with cooling coils, which is consistent with bench-scale testing and actinide removal process (ARP) operation.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2011

ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2010

Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations and vitrification processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 2010 to evaluate these vessels and other waste handling facilities along with evaluations based on data from previous inspections are the subject of this report. The 2010 inspection program revealed that the structural integrity and waste confinement capability of the Savannah River Site waste tanks were maintained. All inspections scheduled per SRR-LWE-2009-00138, HLW Tank Farm Inspection Plan for 2010, were completed. Ultrasonic measurements (UT) performed in 2010 met the requirements of C-ESG-00006, In-Service Inspection Program for High Level Waste Tanks, Rev. 3, and WSRC-TR-2002-00061, Rev.6. UT inspections were performed on Tanks 30, 31 and 32 and the findings are documented in SRNL-STI-2010-00533, Tank Inspection NDE Results for Fiscal Year 2010, Waste Tanks 30, 31 and 32. A total of 5824 photographs were made and 1087 visual and video inspections were performed during 2010. Ten new leaksites at Tank 5 were identified in 2010. The locations of these leaksites are documented in C-ESR-G-00003, SRS High Level Waste Tank Leaksite Information, Rev.5. Ten leaksites at Tank 5 were documented during tank wall/annulus cleaning activities. None of these new leaksites resulted in a release to the environment. The leaksites were documented during wall cleaning activities and the waste nodules associated with the leaksites were washed away. Previously documented leaksites were reactivated at Tank 12 during waste removal activities.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2011

TANK 18 AND 19-F TIER 1A EQUIPMENT FILL MOCK UP TEST SUMMARY

The United States Department of Energy (US DOE) has determined that Tanks 18-F and 19-F have met the F-Tank Farm (FTF) General Closure Plan Requirements and are ready to be permanently closed. The high-level waste (HLW) tanks have been isolated from FTF facilities. To complete operational closure they will be filled with grout for the purpose of: (1) physically stabilizing the tanks, (2) limiting/eliminating vertical pathways to residual waste, (3) discouraging future intrusion, and (4) providing an alkaline, chemical reducing environment within the closure boundary to control speciation and solubility of select radionuclides. Bulk waste removal and heel removal equipment remain in Tanks 18-F and 19-F. This equipment includes the Advance Design Mixer Pump (ADMP), transfer pumps, transfer jets, standard slurry mixer pumps, equipment-support masts, sampling masts, dip tube assemblies and robotic crawlers. The present Tank 18 and 19-F closure strategy is to grout the equipment in place and eliminate vertical pathways by filling voids in the equipment to vertical fast pathways and water infiltration. The mock-up tests described in this report were intended to address placement issues identified for grouting the equipment that will be left in Tank 18-F and Tank 19-F. The Tank 18-F and 19-F closure strategy document states that one of the Performance Assessment (PA) requirements for a closed tank is that equipment remaining in the tank be filled to the extent practical and that vertical flow paths 1 inch and larger be grouted. The specific objectives of the Tier 1A equipment grout mock-up testing include: (1) Identifying the most limiting equipment configurations with respect to internal void space filling; (2) Specifying and constructing initial test geometries and forms that represent scaled boundary conditions; (3) Identifying a target grout rheology for evaluation in the scaled mock-up configurations; (4) Scaling-up production of a grout mix with the target rheology (16 second flow cone value) from 0.25 cubic feet to 4.3 cubic feet. (Ten 0.43 cubic batches were produced because full-scale equipment was not available for the Tier 1A test.); (5) Demonstrating continuous gravity filling of the ADMP mock up test form; (6) Demonstrating continuous gravity filling of 1 inch and 2 inch schedule 40 pipe; and (7) Demonstrating filling of 1 inch and 2 inch schedule 40 pipe from the bottom up by discharging through a tube inserted into the pipes. The Tier 1A mock-up test focused on the ADMP and pipes at least one inch in diameter. The ADMP which is located in center riser of Tank 18-F is a concern because the column for this long-shaft (55 ft) pump is unique and modification to the pump prior to placing it in service limited the flow path options for filling by creating a single flow path for filling and venting the ADMP support column. The large size, vertical orientation, and complicated flow path in the ADMP warrants a detailed description of this piece of ancillary equipment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Investigation of Thermolytic Hydrogen Generation Rate in Tank 44 Dissolved Saltcake Samples

Saltcake core samples collected from Tank 44 in 2006 were dissolved to provide material for HGR measurements applicable to F-Area dissolved saltcake material. Additionally, characterization was performed on the Tank 44 saltcake material. The following are key results from the Tank 44 saltcake characterization. The Tank 44 Upper Saltcake Composite, corresponding to the 171 to 285 inch tank level, contained by mass approximately 69% sodium nitrate, 11% sodium carbonate, 8% sodium nitrite, smaller amounts of other salts and components, and 9% unquantified (which includes water, water of hydration, oxygen/hydrogen content of oxides and hydroxides, and uncertainty). The Tank 44 Lower Saltcake Composite, corresponding to the 76 to 114 inch tank level, contained by mass approximately 49% sodium carbonate, 18% sodium nitrate, smaller amounts of other salts, at least 8% sludge, and 9% unquantified (see above). The dissolved saltcake contained free hydroxide less than quantifiable (<0.01 M) due to the limited quantity of material that could be removed from the Shielded Cells based on the sample radioactivity. Measurement by pH paper provided an approximate pH of 12. The following are key results from the Tank 44 HGR testing. During boiling at 106.7 °C, HGR for Tank 44 dissolved saltcake without added glycolate was 7.2×10 -8 ft 3 h -1 ga l-1 . During boiling at 106.9 °C, HGR for Tank 44 dissolved saltcake with 1000 mg/L of added glycolate was 8.2×10 -8 ft 3 h -1 gal -1 . ∙ For the test without added glycolate, the first several HGR measurements at 70, 85, and 100 °C gave indication of the release of dissolved hydrogen and should not be used to represent the sustained thermolytic HGR for those temperatures. The measurements at boiling are the best representation of thermolysis in this testing. Carbon dioxide was observed at concentrations up to 6 vol% in the flow-system offgas for the test at boiling. ∙ Methane generation was observed at 100 °C and boiling. Methane concentration in the total gas generated during testing remained well below the lower flammability limit for methane in air. The addition of 1000 mg/L of glycolate did not have a significant impact on the hydrogen generation rates measured during this testing. The low hydroxide concentration in the Tank 44 dissolved saltcake likely influenced the relatively low thermolytic HGR and high carbon dioxide release observations in this testing. Based on the observation that methane was generated or released upon heating SRS radioactive Tank 44 waste samples to 100 °C and above, we recommend gaining a greater understanding of the cause and mechanism of its generation. First, the applicable literature should be reviewed to reveal the thermolytic methane generation mechanisms of possible methane generating species in the SRS CSTF. If warranted, a plan should be developed for simulant tests with methylated siloxanes and other applicable compounds in order to gain a better mechanistic understanding of methane generation in the SRS CSTF.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Investigation of Thermolytic Hydrogen Generation Rate in Tank 44 Dissolved Saltcake Samples

Saltcake core samples collected from Tank 44 in 2006 were dissolved to provide material for HGR measurements applicable to F-Area dissolved saltcake material. Additionally, characterization was performed on the Tank 44 saltcake material. The following are key results from the Tank 44 saltcake characterization. The Tank 44 Upper Saltcake Composite, corresponding to the 171 to 285 inch tank level, contained by mass approximately 69% sodium nitrate, 11% sodium carbonate, 8% sodium nitrite, smaller amounts of other salts and components, and 9% unquantified (which includes water, water of hydration, oxygen/hydrogen content of oxides and hydroxides, and uncertainty). The Tank 44 Lower Saltcake Composite, corresponding to the 76 to 114 inch tank level, contained by mass approximately 49% sodium carbonate, 18% sodium nitrate, smaller amounts of other salts, at least 8% sludge, and 9% unquantified (see above). The dissolved saltcake contained free hydroxide less than quantifiable (<0.01 M) due to the limited quantity of material that could be removed from the Shielded Cells based on the sample radioactivity. Measurement by pH paper provided an approximate pH of 12. The following are key results from the Tank 44 HGR testing. During boiling at 106.7 °C, HGR for Tank 44 dissolved saltcake without added glycolate was 7.2×10 -8 ft 3 h -1 gal -1 . During boiling at 106.9 °C, HGR for Tank 44 dissolved saltcake with 1000 mg/L of added glycolate was 8.2×10 -8 ft 3 h -1 gal -1 . For the test without added glycolate, the first several HGR measurements at 70, 85, and 100 °C gave indication of the release of dissolved hydrogen and should not be used to represent the sustained thermolytic HGR for those temperatures. The measurements at boiling are the best representation of thermolysis in this testing. Carbon dioxide was observed at concentrations up to 6 vol% in the flow-system offgas for the test at boiling. Methane generation was observed at 100 °C and boiling. Methane concentration in the total gas generated during testing remained well below the lower flammability limit for methane in air. The addition of 1000 mg/L of glycolate did not have a significant impact on the hydrogen generation rates measured during this testing. The low hydroxide concentration in the Tank 44 dissolved saltcake likely influenced the relatively low thermolytic HGR and high carbon dioxide release observations in this testing. Based on the observation that methane was generated or released upon heating SRS radioactive Tank 44 waste samples to 100 °C and above, we recommend gaining a greater understanding of the cause and mechanism of its generation. First, the applicable literature should be reviewed to reveal the thermolytic methane generation mechanisms of possible methane generating species in the SRS CSTF. If warranted, a plan should be developed for simulant tests with methylated siloxanes and other applicable compounds in order to gain a better mechanistic understanding of methane generation in the SRS CSTF.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hanford Tank Vapors in Worker Breathing Zones - Source, Dispersion, and Receptor Data - 20373

A wide range of organic and inorganic chemicals from historical Hanford Site processes are now stored in 177 underground storage tanks at the Hanford tank farms. Workers at the Hanford tank farms have expressed concerns about chemical vapor exposures for many years. During the spring of 2014, worker reports of chemical odors and/or symptoms prompted the development of the Savannah River National Laboratory Hanford Tank Vapor Assessment Team (TVAT) and their resulting independent assessment and recommendations concerning tank farm worker reports of vapors. The Tank Vapor Assessment report included a hypothesis that 'vapors coming out of tanks in high concentration (bolus) plumes sporadically intersected with the breathing zones of workers, resulting in brief but intense exposures to some workers.' The focus of this effort is to present current knowledge to describe the mechanisms by which workers may experience short duration vapor concentrations above background in the tank farms environment. The TVAT hypothesis that workers have experienced concentrations approaching 80% of the tank headspace up to 3 meters (10 feet) from tank sources is not supported by sampling data or modeling results. Modeling indicates that concentrations are quickly reduced from the source, and that the upper end of predicted concentrations at worker breathing zones are a factor of 10 or more lower than source concentrations. Area measurements corroborate the fact that worker breathing zone concentrations are 10 to 100 times lower than source concentrations, and events with elevated concentrations are rare. These reduced vapor concentration levels may result in detectable odors or irritation, depending on a worker's specific odor threshold and sensitivity to the chemical species. Short-duration vapor events may be mitigated by evaluating daily atmospheric conditions in conjunction with planned tank farm activities. Monitoring changing conditions related to tank vapors concentrations at the source and within worker breathing zone is also an important step to protect workers from short duration elevated concentration events. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Progress on Advancing the Robotic Air-slot Volumetric Inspection System (RAVIS) for Hanford Under-tank Inspection - 20519

The 27 in-service double-shell tank (DST) systems at Hanford provide interim storage for nearly 56 million gallons of nuclear and hazardous chemical legacy waste. The safe and reliable storage of the waste is critical to the site's extended cleanup mission. While in service, the leak integrity of the DSTs must be demonstrated to satisfy the Washington Administrative Code, inform decisions on tank management, and gauge fitness for continued service beyond originally intended design lives. The carbon steel plates and welds that comprise DST primary tank sidewalls and lower knuckles are routinely 'sampled' for volumetric non-destructive testing using ultrasonic inspection technology to determine whether corrosion pitting, cracking, or general corrosion are occurring that could compromise tank leak integrity. However, the carbon steel plates and welds that comprise the bottoms of primary tanks have not been thoroughly inspected since the DSTs were constructed (i.e., since 1968-1986) due to limited physical access to the exterior tank bottoms. The Robotic Air-slot Volumetric Inspection System, or 'RAVIS,' is being engineered to overcome the challenge of tank bottom in-service inspection. The system will be deployed under primary tanks within the small cooling channels/air-slots in the refractory pads upon which the tanks rest and will use ultrasonic guided wave inspection technology to volumetrically inspect physically inaccessible regions that make up ∼90% of a tank bottom, as well as regions that are physically accessible from the air-slots but comprise only ∼10% of a tank bottom. This paper describes the air-slot sensor and robotic deployment system and focuses on the testing approach and methods that are being applied to support (1) design feedback and performance acceptance (requirement verification) and (2) performance repeatability/reliability assessments (qualification) to ensure the RAVIS is prepared for successful inservice inspections of primary tank bottoms. Test progress made against the test plan, the results of 2019 testing, and the future outlook are included. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

Analysis of the Tank 6F Final Characterization Samples-2012 (U)

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested by Savannah River Remediation (SRR) to provide sample preparation and analysis of the Tank 6F final characterization samples to determine the residual tank inventory prior to grouting. Fourteen residual Tank 6F solid samples from three areas on the floor of the tank were collected and delivered to SRNL between May and August 2011. These Tank 6F samples were homogenized and combined into three composite samples based on a proportion compositing scheme and the resulting composite samples were analyzed for radiological, chemical and elemental components. Additional measurements performed on the Tank 6F composite samples include bulk density and water leaching of the solids to account for water soluble components. The composite Tank 6F samples were analyzed and the data reported in triplicate. Sufficient quality assurance standards and blanks were utilized to demonstrate adequate characterization of the Tank 6F samples. The main evaluation criteria were target detection limits specified in the technical task request document. While many of the target detection limits were met for the species characterized for Tank 6F some were not met. In a few cases, the relatively high levels of radioactive species of the same element or a chemically similar element precluded the ability to measure some isotopes to low levels. The isotopes whose detection limits were not met in all cases included Sn-126, Sb-126, Sb-126m, Eu-152, Cm-243 and Cf-249. SRNL, in conjunction with the customer, reviewed all of these cases and determined that the impacts of not meeting the target detection limits were acceptable. Based on the analyses of variance (ANOVA) for the inorganic constituents of Tank 6F, all the inorganic constituents displayed heterogeneity. The inorganic results demonstrated consistent differences across the composite samples: lowest concentrations for Composite Sample 1, intermediate-valued concentrations for Composite Sample 2, and highest concentrations for Composite Sample 3. The Hg and Mo results suggest possible measurement outliers. However, the magnitudes of the differences between the Hg 95% upper confidence limit (UCL95) results with and without the outlier and the magnitudes of the differences between the Mo UCL95 results with and without the outlier do not appear to have practical significance. It is recommended to remove the potential measurement outliers. Doing so is conservative in the sense of producing a higher UCL95 for Hg and Mo than if the potential outliers were included in the calculations. In contrast to the inorganic results, most of the radionuclides did not demonstrate heterogeneity among the three Tank 6F composite sample characterization results.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2013

Analysis of the Tank 6F Final Characterization Samples-2012

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested by Savannah River Remediation (SRR) to provide sample preparation and analysis of the Tank 6F final characterization samples to determine the residual tank inventory prior to grouting. Fourteen residual Tank 6F solid samples from three areas on the floor of the tank were collected and delivered to SRNL between May and August 2011. These Tank 6F samples were homogenized and combined into three composite samples based on a proportion compositing scheme and the resulting composite samples were analyzed for radiological, chemical and elemental components. Additional measurements performed on the Tank 6F composite samples include bulk density and water leaching of the solids to account for water soluble components. The composite Tank 6F samples were analyzed and the data reported in triplicate. Sufficient quality assurance standards and blanks were utilized to demonstrate adequate characterization of the Tank 6F samples. The main evaluation criteria were target detection limits specified in the technical task request document. While many of the target detection limits were met for the species characterized for Tank 6F some were not met. In a few cases, the relatively high levels of radioactive species of the same element or a chemically similar element precluded the ability to measure some isotopes to low levels. The isotopes whose detection limits were not met in all cases included Sn-126, Sb-126, Sb-126m, Eu-152, Cm- 243 and Cf-249. SRNL, in conjunction with the customer, reviewed all of these cases and determined that the impacts of not meeting the target detection limits were acceptable. Based on the analyses of variance (ANOVA) for the inorganic constituents of Tank 6F, all the inorganic constituents displayed heterogeneity. The inorganic results demonstrated consistent differences across the composite samples: lowest concentrations for Composite Sample 1, intermediate-valued concentrations for Composite Sample 2, and highest concentrations for Composite Sample 3. The Hg and Mo results suggest possible measurement outliers. However, the magnitudes of the differences between the Hg 95% upper confidence limit (UCL95) results with and without the outlier and the magnitudes of the differences between the Mo UCL95 results with and without the outlier do not appear to have practical significance. It is recommended to remove the potential measurement outliers. Doing so is conservative in the sense of producing a higher UCL95 for Hg and Mo than if the potential outliers were included in the calculations. In contrast to the inorganic results, most of the radionuclides did not demonstrate heterogeneity among the three Tank 6F composite sample characterization results.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Tank 49H Solids Disturbance Analysis

Tank 49H will serve as the feed tank for the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). Transfers into Tank 49H may disturb solids that have settled to the bottom of the tank, resulting in feed that may exceed the insoluble solids content limit of 1,200 mg/L from the SWPF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC). During a transfer into Tank 49H, material that free falls into Tank 49H through a downcomer and passes through the supernate could potentially disturb the solids on the bottom of the tank and scour or suspend solids from a settled solids layer or turbid region. A previous analysis and report evaluated the potential to disturb solids when transferring into Tank 49H through the B4 riser and recommended a minimum tank level of 120 inches to prevent disturbing any solids in the bottom of the tank. The scope of this task is to perform additional fluid flow analysis to determine the impact of a “plunging jet” through the C3 downcomer on solids in Tank 49H and to determine a minimum liquid level to be maintained in Tank 49H prior to transfers that will minimize disturbing the solids and exceeding the SWPF WAC limits for insoluble solids carryover to SWPF since the C3 riser downcomer is at a lower elevation and farther away from the B5 transfer pump than the B4 downcomer.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Tank 49H Solids Disturbance Analysis

Tank 49H will serve as the feed tank for the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). Transfers into Tank 49H may disturb solids that have settled to the bottom of the tank, resulting in feed that may exceed the insoluble solids content limit of 1,200 mg/L from the SWPF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC). During a transfer into Tank 49H, material that free falls into Tank 49H through a downcomer and passes through the supernate could potentially disturb the solids on the bottom of the tank and scour or suspend solids from a settled solids layer or turbid region. A previous analysis and report evaluated the potential to disturb solids when transferring into Tank 49H through the B4 riser and recommended a minimum tank level of 120 inches to prevent disturbing any solids in the bottom of the tank. The scope of this task is to perform additional fluid flow analysis to determine the impact of a “plunging jet” through the C3 downcomer on solids in Tank 49H and to determine a minimum liquid level to be maintained in Tank 49H prior to transfers that will minimize disturbing the solids and exceeding the SWPF WAC limits for insoluble solids carryover to SWPF since the C3 riser downcomer is at a lower elevation and farther away from the B5 transfer pump than the B4 downcomer.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Thermal Ratcheting Analysis of TEDS Packed-bed Thermocline Energy Storage Tank - Modeling Methodology and Data Validation

This report investigates numerical modeling methods for thermal ratcheting analysis of packed-bed thermal energy storage (TES) tank and discusses the validation results via comparison with experimental data. The experimental data obtained from various design characteristics of packed-bed thermocline tanks, including the Thermal Energy Distribution System (TEDS) TES tank at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), were used to validate thermal and mechanical models developed in this study to evaluate the thermal ratcheting potential. The thermal model was shown to predict the transient thermal propagation through the packed-bed thermocline tanks generally well. However, a larger discrepancy was observed during the comparison with the data from TEDS, presumably due to the uncertainty of boundary conditions given from the experiment. Based on the comparative study between the thermal model predictions and experimental data of various packed-bed thermocline tanks, potential improvements were suggested for the future TEDS experiments for more precise validation study. For mechanical (thermally induced stress) analysis, two different modeling approaches were tested to evaluate hoop stress applied to the packed-bed TES tank wall, which is a major cause of thermal ratcheting process: (i) infinite rigidity model and (ii) Drucker-Prager (DP) model. The ‘model (i)’ is a conservative method with infinite rigidity assumption of granular filler inside a TES tank, whereas the ‘model (ii)’ is a method that takes into account more realistic processes such as thermal expansion of filler and tank wall as well as inter-particle interactions during the cyclic operation of a packed-bed TES tank. The validity of each modeling method was examined by comparing the numerical simulation with the experimental data obtained from the packed-bed TES tank for Solar One pilot plant. Then, the effects of various model parameters were discussed to evaluate the thermal ratcheting potential of the TEDS TES tank. The preliminary thermal ratcheting analysis implies that the TEDS TES tank will hold its structural integrity during the normal operation cycles.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Integrity Monitoring, Prediction and Assessment, Corrosion Control, and Repair of the Hanford Storage Tanks – 25213

The Hanford Nuclear Reservation site contains approximately 211 million liters of radioactive and chemically hazardous waste arising from nuclear weapons production, beginning with World War II, and continuing through the Cold War [1]. The waste is stored in 177 carbon-steel underground storage tanks, of which 149 are single-shell tanks (SSTs) and the remaining are double-shell tanks (DSTs). The mission of an ongoing River Protection Project is to retrieve the waste from the underground storage tanks and then treat and immobilize (i.e., vitrify) it for disposal. Waste from the older SSTs is being progressively retrieved into the newer DSTs for storage pending treatment, immobilization, and disposal. Figure 1 depicts a typical DST design [2]. The tank is approximately 23 m in diameter and 9 m high and has a domed structure and has a capacity of 4000 m3. The tank wall and floor vary in thickness between approximately 10 mm and 25 mm depending on location. The thicker wall sections are near the curved transition between the tank wall and the floor, while the thinner sections are located near the top of the tank wall. The tank floor thickness varies from 25 mm at the tank center to 10 mm near the tank wall. The tanks were constructed of either ASTM A516 Grade 65 or ASTM A537 Class 1 carbon steel and were post-weld heat treated to reduce the risk of SCC.

Shukla, Pavan K. [Savannah River National Laborato↗
NASA NTRS2003

Strain-Gauge Measurement of Weight of Fluid in a Tank

A method of determining the amount of fluid in a tank is based on measurement of strains induced in tank supports by the weight of the fluid. Unlike most prior methods, this method is nonintrusive: there is no need to insert instrumentation in the tank and, hence, no need to run wires, cables, or tubes through the tank wall. Also unlike most prior methods, this method is applicable even if the fluid in the tank is at supercritical pressure and temperature, because it does not depend on the presence of a liquid/gas interface (as in liquid-level-measuring methods). The strain gauges used in this method are of two types: foil and fiber-optic. Four foil gauges and one or more fiber-optic gauges are mounted on each of the tank-supporting legs. An additional fiber-optic gauge is mounted on an object, made of the same material as that of the tank-supporting legs, that is not subjected to any mechanical load. The reading obtained by the additional fiber-optic gauge is used to compensate for apparent strains caused by changes in temperature. The signals from the foil and fiber-optic gauges are conditioned, then digitized for input to a computer. As the tank is filled or emptied, the deformation in each leg increases or decreases, respectively. Measured deformations of all legs are added to obtain a composite deformation indicative of the change in weight of the tank plus fluid. An initial calibration is performed by recording data at two points (usually, empty and full) for which the mass or weight of fluid is known. It is assumed that the deformations are elastic, so that the line passing through the two points can be used as a calibration curve of mass (or weight) of fluid versus deformation. At the time of reporting the information for this article, a set of foil gauges had been tested on the supports of a 500-gallon (1,900-liter) tank. The gauges were found to be capable of measuring the deformations (up to 22 microstrain) that occurred during filling and emptying the tank. The fluid masses calculated from the gauge readings were found to be accurate within 4.5 percent. It has been estimated that once the fiber-optic gauges are put into operation, it should be possible to determine fluid masses with 3 percent or less. It may be possible to increase accuracy further by increasing the signal-to-noise ratio through the use of more deformable tank supporting legs.

Figueroa, Jorge↗
NASA NTRS1992

Method of delivering lunar generated fluid to earth orbit using an external tank

A method and apparatus are provided for delivering lunar generated fluid to Earth orbit from lunar orbit. Transport takes place in an external tank of a shuttle which has been suitably outfitted in Earth orbit for reusable travel between Earth orbit and a lunar orbit. The outfitting of the external tank includes the adding of an engine, an electrical system, a communication system, a guidance system, an aerobraking device, and a plurality of interconnected fluid storage tanks to the hydrogen and oxygen tanks of the external tank. The external tank is then propelled to lunar orbit the first time using Earth-based propellant. In lunar orbit, the storage tanks are filled with the lunar generated fluid with the remainder tank volumes filled with lunar generated liquid oxygen and hydrogen which serve as propellants for returning the tank to Earth orbit where the fluid is off-loaded. The remaining lunar generated oxygen and hydrogen is then sufficient to return the external tank to lunar orbit so that a subsequent cycle of fluid delivery is repeated. A space station in a higher Earth orbit is preferably used to outfit the external tank, and a lunar node in lunar orbit is used to store and transfer the fluid and liquid oxygen and hydrogen to the external tank. The lunar generated fluid is preferably .sup.3 He.

Butterfield, Ansel J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Liquid Hydrogen Propellant Tank Sub-Surface Pressurization with Gaseous Helium

A series of tests were conducted to evaluate the performance of a propellant tank pressurization system with the pressurant diffuser intentionally submerged beneath the surface of the liquid. Propellant tanks and pressurization systems are typically designed with the diffuser positioned to apply pressurant gas directly into the tank ullage space when the liquid propellant is settled. Space vehicles, and potentially propellant depots, may need to conduct tank pressurization operations in micro‐gravity environments where the exact location of the liquid relative to the diffuser is not well understood. If the diffuser is positioned to supply pressurant gas directly to the tank ullage space when the propellant is settled, then it may become partially or completely submerged when the liquid becomes unsettled in a microgravity environment. In such case, the pressurization system performance will be adversely affected requiring additional pressurant mass and longer pressurization times. This series of tests compares and evaluates pressurization system performance using the conventional method of supplying pressurant gas directly to the propellant tank ullage, and then supplying pressurant gas beneath the liquid surface. The pressurization tests were conducted on the Engineering Development Unit (EDU) located at Test Stand 300 at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). EDU is a ground based Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) test article supported by Glenn Research Center (GRC) and MSFC. A 150 ft3 propellant tank was filled with liquid hydrogen (LH2). The pressurization system used regulated ambient helium (GHe) as a pressurant, a variable position valve to maintain flow rate, and two identical independent pressurant diffusers. The ullage diffuser was located in the forward end of the tank and was completely exposed to the tank ullage. The submerged diffuser was located in the aft end of the tank and was completely submerged when the tank liquid level was 10% or greater. The ullage diffuser tests were conducted as a baseline to evaluate the performance of the pressurization system, and the submerged diffuser tests showed how the performance of the pressurization system was compromised when the diffuser was submerged in LH2. The test results are evaluated and compared, and included in this report for various propellant tank fill levels.

Stephens, J. R.↗